1998 PLP 1124 (SCMR)
JADEED GUL ‑‑‑ Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1998 PLP 1124 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Saiduzzanian Siddiqui and Raja Afrasiab Khan, JJ |
| Parties | JADEED GUL ‑‑‑ Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 1124 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP 1124 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Saiduzzanian Siddiqui and Raja Afrasiab Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP 1124 (SCMR) (JADEED GUL ‑‑‑ Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Basharatullah. Advocate Supreme Court with Muhammad Munir Peracha, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on -Record for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 11th March, 1998.
- Basharatullah. Advocate Supreme Court with Muhammad Munir Peracha, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on -Record for Petitioner.
- Raja Abdul Ghafoor, Advocate-on-Record for the State.
- 2. The learned counsel submitted that the petitioner was arrested on 29th of March, 1997. The trial against him has not yet commenced. He states that the case of the petitioner does not fall under the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. inasmuch as the maximum sentence in the offences does not exceed 10 years. Learned Additional Advocate-General informs this Court that the Drug Court is not functioning these days because of non-availability .of the Presiding Officer. He has also stated that he is unable to give the exact time frame within which the trial is likely to be concluded.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order of the Balochistan High Court Quetta dated 3‑9‑1997 passed in Criminal Bail Application No.91 of 1997). ‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), 5.274/275/276/ 420/483/482/485/487/467/468/471‑‑‑Drugs Act (XXXI of 1976), S.23/27‑‑ Bail, grant of‑‑‑Trial of accused had not been concluded within two months despite direction of Supreme Court as Drug Court was not functioning due to non‑availability of the Presiding Officer‑‑‑Prosecution was unable to give time within which trial was likely to be concluded‑‑‑Case of accused did not fall under the prohibitory clause of S.497(1), Cr.P.C.‑‑‑Accused was admitted to bail in circumstances. Raja Abdul Ghafoor, Advocate‑on‑Record for the State.
Judgment & Decree
RAJA AFRASIAB KHAN, J.
On 29th of March, 1997, a case under section 274/275/276/420/483/482/485/487/467/468/471, P.P.C. read with sections 23 and 27 of the Drugs Act, 1976 was registered with Police Station Crimes Branch, Quetta against Jadeed Gul, Muhammad Jehangir Qasim and Abdul Karim on the complaint of Dr. Muhammad Azeem. The allegations were that Jadeed Gul, Muhammad Jehangir Qasim and Abdul Karim had been doing the business of spurious drugs. Muhammad Jehangir Qasim was apprehended as the information of Haji Abdul Karim. He informed that Jadeed Gul, the petitioner was also involved in the business of spurious drugs. The drugs were being sold through "Gul Medical Store" situated at Jinnah Road, Quetta. Additional Sessions Judge-III, Quetta vide his order dated 8th and 16th of May, 1997 granted bail to the aforesaid accused despite the fact that the High Court did not grant bail to them. On 30th of May, 1997, in exercise of Suo Motu powers, the High Court issued notices to the accused for cancellation of their bail. The State, through Criminal (Cancellation) Bail Application No.163 of 1997 also sought the cancellation of bail of the accused. The High Court vide its detailed order dated 3rd of September, 1997 cancelled the bail of Jadeed Gul and his co-accused, Muhammad Jahangir Qasim. The bail granting order to the extent of Abdul Karim was, however, upheld. In the result, both the accused were taken into custody. In the earlier round, on 25th of November 1997, bail application of the petitioner was dismissed by this Court with the observation:-- "We have decided to refrain from making any observation, one way or the other, on the contentions raised in support of this petition at this juncture. Suffice it to observe that as the challan in this case has been put in the Drug Court, we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Nonetheless, if the trial is not concluded by the trial Court within two months, the petitioner would be at liberty to repeat his plea of bail in this Court. With this observation, this petition is, accordingly, dismissed." The petitioner, Jadeed Gul has filed this petition for his admission to bail on the basis of observation referred to above. It is admitted that trial of the accused has not been concluded despite direction of this Court.
2. The learned counsel submitted that the petitioner was arrested on 29th of March, 1997. The trial against him has not yet commenced. He states that the case of the petitioner does not fall under the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. inasmuch as the maximum sentence in the offences does not exceed 10 years. Learned Additional Advocate-General informs this Court that the Drug Court is not functioning these days because of non-availability .of the Presiding Officer. He has also stated that he is unable to give the exact time frame within which the trial is likely to be concluded. Due to above reason, the direction of this Court could not be complied with.
3. In these circumstances, without touching the merits of the case, we are inclined to observe that a case for grant of bail has been made out. The petitioner is, accordingly admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.5,00,000 (rupees five lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Additional Registrar of the Balochistan High Court, Quetta. This Criminal Application No.23/98 is, accepted in the above terms.
4. The petitioner was released on bail through our short. order dated 11-3-1998. These are the reasons in support of the said order. N.H.Q./J-12/S Bail allowed.